Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 65

Thread: Why do you think dependencies are superior (with a catch)

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Beans
    23

    Question Why do you think dependencies are superior (with a catch)

    To me it seems dependencies are the root of 99% of user problems not related to hardware.

    If you took arguments that the average user didn't care about and would never need to know, there is no support for them whatsoever. If you can't talk about how shared and dynamic libraries work, how it saves what is probably less than a gigabyte, and can only talk about how the competitors of Mac and Windows require applications to ship with what you call dependencies, or security issues, how can you possibly defend them?

    If the average user just wants it to work, and ubuntu wants to compete with Windows and Mac, why don't we have self contained install files as well? PCBSD has already done this, so it could be used as a model. They've literally already thought through the issues and finished the system.

    Sorry, but it just defies reason that you're still hanging onto dependencies as better when they have such huge downsides that you must be ignoring. (server costs, people seeking help needing to use command lines, 3rd party packages that need renamed/merged dependencies. It's always ends up being a dependency problem)

    Can you possibly defend them if you aren't thinking about technical details and only in terms of usability? I'm sure you can't, but let's see. To me it's just such a no brainer question, but if the Linux community keeps standing behind them for only technical reasons, they'll be keeping Desktop Linux from ever being a serious competitor.

    (Anyone who mentions dll hell, shared/dynamic libraries, and security issues fails. Only usability issues are valid arguments here. (PCBSD found chroot jails fixed security problems))

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Beans
    1,042
    Distro
    Ubuntu Karmic Koala (testing)

    Re: Why do you think dependencies are superior (with a catch)

    Quote Originally Posted by shadoweva00 View Post
    (Anyone who mentions dll hell, shared/dynamic libraries, and security issues fails. Only usability issues are valid arguments here. (PCBSD found chroot jails fixed security problems))
    I don't believe that gravity exists. Please do not try to dissuade me by allowing objects with mass to fall. If you attempt to prove the existence of gravity by dropping heavy objects, you fail, because that is obviously not a valid method of proving it.



    While you're at it, prove to me that I cannot fly. If you try to prove that I cannot fly by throwing me off a cliff and watching me drop like a brick, you fail, because that is obviously an overused and tiresome piece of so-called "evidence."
    He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
    -Thomas Paine

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    4newOtherOSTalk4umCsig
    Beans
    555

    Re: Why do you think dependencies are superior (with a catch)

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxIBoy View Post
    I don't believe that gravity exists. Please do not try to dissuade me by allowing objects with mass to fall. If you attempt to prove the existence of gravity by dropping heavy objects, you fail, because that is obviously not a valid method of proving it.



    While you're at it, prove to me that I cannot fly. If you try to prove that I cannot fly by throwing me off a cliff and watching me drop like a brick, you fail, because that is obviously an overused and tiresome piece of so-called "evidence."
    I giggled.
    PhenomII 720x4@3.65gHz w/Zalman cooler,PNY Nvidia GTX260, 4GB, Arch64

    14 is NOT a random number!!!!!
    Arch Linux | new Other OS Talk forum

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Beans
    23

    Re: Why do you think dependencies are superior (with a catch)

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxIBoy View Post
    I don't believe that gravity exists. Please do not try to dissuade me by allowing objects with mass to fall. If you attempt to prove the existence of gravity by dropping heavy objects, you fail, because that is obviously not a valid method of proving it.



    While you're at it, prove to me that I cannot fly. If you try to prove that I cannot fly by throwing me off a cliff and watching me drop like a brick, you fail, because that is obviously an overused and tiresome piece of so-called "evidence."
    See, if you just admitted that self contained installers like those of windows, mac, and PCBSD make the system "just work" far more than dependencies ever will, Ubuntu can be a much better competitor.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Beans
    9

    Re: Why do you think dependencies are superior (with a catch)

    Quote Originally Posted by shadoweva00 View Post
    To me it seems dependencies are the root of 99% of user problems not related to hardware.

    If you took arguments that the average user didn't care about and would never need to know, there is no support for them whatsoever. If you can't talk about how shared and dynamic libraries work, how it saves what is probably less than a gigabyte, and can only talk about how the competitors of Mac and Windows require applications to ship with what you call dependencies, or security issues, how can you possibly defend them?

    If the average user just wants it to work, and ubuntu wants to compete with Windows and Mac, why don't we have self contained install files as well? PCBSD has already done this, so it could be used as a model. They've literally already thought through the issues and finished the system.

    Sorry, but it just defies reason that you're still hanging onto dependencies as better when they have such huge downsides that you must be ignoring. (server costs, people seeking help needing to use command lines, 3rd party packages that need renamed/merged dependencies. It's always ends up being a dependency problem)

    Can you possibly defend them if you aren't thinking about technical details and only in terms of usability? I'm sure you can't, but let's see. To me it's just such a no brainer question, but if the Linux community keeps standing behind them for only technical reasons, they'll be keeping Desktop Linux from ever being a serious competitor.

    (Anyone who mentions dll hell, shared/dynamic libraries, and security issues fails. Only usability issues are valid arguments here. (PCBSD found chroot jails fixed security problems))
    So each application should be installed with it's own libraries, even though those libraries may be duplicated on the same system. Sort of sounds like you want Windows to me.

    www.microsoft.com

    Be prepared, they may want your credit card details. Amongst other things.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    $HOME (Washington State)
    Beans
    4,590

    Re: Why do you think dependencies are superior (with a catch)

    Quote Originally Posted by shadoweva00 View Post
    See, if you just admitted that self contained installers like those of windows, mac, and PCBSD make the system "just work" far more than dependencies ever will, Ubuntu can be a much better competitor.
    What would happen if you installed two programs which relied on two different versions of the same library which was located in the same place? The one with the dependence on the older library would probably break, because the newer copy would be installed.
    See my themes here! | Dont preach Linux, mention it | Make GNOME Themes
    I'm no longer on here. If you want to talk to me, go to noost.org.
    My DeviantArt | Linux user #461096 | Ubuntu user #15753

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Beans
    1,042
    Distro
    Ubuntu Karmic Koala (testing)

    Re: Why do you think dependencies are superior (with a catch)

    DLL Hell, shared libraries, and security holes are all usability issues, which is why I think the OP's question cannot be answered in any meaningful way. It's like trying to define the word "vehicle" without mentioning transportation or movement.

    In other words, "Objection! Assumes organ not in evidence!"
    He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
    -Thomas Paine

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Beans
    23

    Re: Why do you think dependencies are superior (with a catch)

    Quote Originally Posted by smartboyathome View Post
    What would happen if you installed two programs which relied on two different versions of the same library which was located in the same place? The one with the dependence on the older library would probably break, because the newer copy would be installed.
    No, it would be like Mac and PCBSD. Each application get's it's own folder and anything that the OS doesn't provide (X, dhcp, etc...) would be bundled there. Every program just works, you don't need to download extra dependencies, the distro maintainers don't need to host huge repositories and pay for bandwidth, power costs for the servers hosting the repository...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    $HOME (Washington State)
    Beans
    4,590

    Re: Why do you think dependencies are superior (with a catch)

    Quote Originally Posted by shadoweva00 View Post
    No, it would be like Mac and PCBSD. Each application get's it's own folder and anything that the OS doesn't provide (X, dhcp, etc...) would be bundled there. Every program just works, you don't need to download extra dependencies, the distro maintainers don't need to host huge repositories and pay for bandwidth, power costs for the servers hosting the repository...
    So, basically you would have to compile most of Linux for each package? The way you describe, since Linux has many dependancies, something like BASH would have to be included with every app, along with GCC, Glibc, etc. That would give you a huge package for each file, and would actually waste space imo.
    See my themes here! | Dont preach Linux, mention it | Make GNOME Themes
    I'm no longer on here. If you want to talk to me, go to noost.org.
    My DeviantArt | Linux user #461096 | Ubuntu user #15753

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Beans
    1,042
    Distro
    Ubuntu Karmic Koala (testing)

    Re: Why do you think dependencies are superior (with a catch)

    Quote Originally Posted by shadoweva00 View Post
    No, it would be like Mac and PCBSD. Each application get's it's own folder and anything that the OS doesn't provide (X, dhcp, etc...)
    What the hell are you smoking? X, Dhcp, and so on, should not be provided! Nothing should be provided! Don't you know how annoying dependencies are? Every program should come with its own window system, Internet code, graphics drivers, and so on. Heck, every program should come with its own operating system! It's totally worth the effort, just to avoid dependencies! Even if you had to specifically design your program to accommodate every other combination of programs that the user might run at the same time. Totally worth the trouble. And we can't compromise on this, either. If just one little feature was provided, that would be a dependency, and dependencies are bad for usability.
    ...would be bundled there. Every program just works, you don't need to download extra dependencies, the distro maintainers don't need to host huge repositories and pay for bandwidth, power costs for the servers hosting the repository...
    Sounds good to me! Here's your computer (minus the pesky "hard drive" dependency,) now get programming!
    He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
    -Thomas Paine

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •